Chapter II (2)

א CODEX SINAITICUS, now in St. Petersburg, contains the entire New Testament written in the fourth or more probably at the beginning of the fifth century. The story of its discovery and acquisition is quite romantic. When Tischendorf, under the patronage of his sovereign King Frederick Augustus of Saxony, came to the Convent of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai for the first time in 1844, he rescued from a basket there forty-three old sheets of parchment which, with other rubbish, were destined for the fire. In this way he obtained possession of portions of one of the oldest MSS. of the Old Testament, which he published as the Codex Frederico-Augustanus (F-A) in 1846. At the same time he learned that other portions of the same Codex existed in the Monastery. He could find no trace of these, however, on his second visit in 1853. But on his third visit, undertaken with the patronage of the Emperor of Russia, the steward of the monastery brought him, shortly before his departure on the 4th February 1859, what surpassed all his expectations, the entire remaining portions of the Codex comprising a great part of the Old Testament and the whole of the New, wrapped up in a red cloth. Not only was the New Testament perfect, but in addition to the twenty-seven books, the MS. contained the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the so-called Shepherd of Hermas, two books of the greatest repute in early Christian times, the Greek text of which was only partially extant in Europe. Tischendorf managed to secure the MS. for the Emperor of Russia, at whose expense it was published in four folio volumes in the year 1862 on the thousandth anniversary of the founding of the Russian Empire. In return for the MS. the monastery received a silver shrine for St. Catherine, a gift of 7000 roubles for the library and 2000 for the monastery on Mount Tabor, while several Russian decorations were distributed among the Fathers.

Unfortunately the art of photography was not so far advanced thirty-eight years ago as to permit a perfect facsimile to be made of the MS., and Tischendorf had to be content with a printed copy executed as faithfully as the utmost care and superintendence would admit.

To what date does the manuscript belong? There is still extant a letter of the first Christian Emperor Constantine dating from the year 331, in which he asks Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, to provide him with fifty copies of the Old and New Testament for use in the principal churches of his empire (πεντήκοντα σωμάτια ἐν διφθέραις ἐγκατασκεύοις) and puts two public carriages at the bishop’s disposal for their safe transport. We have also the letter that Eusebius sent along with these Bibles, in which he consigns them ἐν πολυτελῶς ἠσκημένοις τεύχεσι τρισσᾶ καὶ τετρασσᾶ—_i.e._ “in expensively prepared volumes of three and four.” With former scholars Tischendorf understood the expression τρισσᾶ καὶ τετρασσᾶ of the number of sheets in the quires of the manuscripts, as though they had been composed of ternions and quaternions of twelve and sixteen pages respectively. Others took it as referring to the number of columns on the pages, Codex Sinaiticus, which Tischendorf believed to be one of these fifty Bibles, being unique in showing four columns to the page. The most probable explanation of the phrase is, however, that it indicates the number of volumes each Bible comprised, and means that each Bible of three or four parts, as the case might be, was packed in a separate box.[59] Tischendorf, as has been said, saw in Codex Sinaiticus one of these fifty Bibles. He also thought that א was the work of four different scribes, and was confident that one of these, the one who had written only six leaves of the New Testament, was the scribe of Codex Vaticanus. But other authorities bring א down to the beginning of the fifth century.

One can understand how it was that Tischendorf was led to overrate the value of this manuscript at first, and to call it by the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet to signify its pre-eminence over all other manuscripts. The claim is so far justified that it is at least one of the oldest manuscripts, and of the oldest the only one that contains the entire New Testament. The order is that of the Gospels, Pauline Epistles (among which Hebrews is found after 2 Thess.), Acts, Catholic Epistles, Apocalypse, after which come Barnabas and Hermas.[60] This same order is observed in the Old Syriac Bible, and in the first printed Greek New Testament, the Complutensian Polyglot. The fact that Barnabas is still tacitly included in the books of the New Testament may be taken equally as indicating the age of א itself or that of the exemplar from which it was copied.[61] Jerome’s recension of Origen’s Lexicon of Proper Names in the Greek New Testament is still extant, and in it Barnabas is cited like the other books. In the Catalogus Claromontanus, which is a very old list of the books of the New Testament, Barnabas is even found before the Apocalypse, an arrangement which is not found again in the succeeding centuries.

[Transcriber’s Note: In this paragraph, there are two cases of letters separated by a slash, as if describing arithmetic division, like “a/b”. In the original book they are printed with the first item, “a”, raised up, and the second item, “b”, printed below the first. In this e-book, they are represented in this “a/b” form.]

[Sidenote: Canons.]

א is also the oldest MS. that has the so-called =Ammonian Sections= and =Eusebian Canons=. In order to facilitate the study of the Gospels, Ammonius of Alexandria arranged, alongside of Matthew’s Gospel, the parallel passages in Mark, Luke, and John. For this purpose he was obliged of course to dislocate these last.[62] Eusebius, however, simply divided the four Gospels into 1162 sections—viz., 355 in Matthew, 233 in Mark, 342 in Luke, and 232 in John. These he numbered consecutively in each Gospel, and then arranged the numbers in ten Canons or Tables. The first contained those passages which are found in all the four Gospels; the second, third, and fourth those common to any particular combination of three; the fifth to the ninth comprised the passages common to any two, and the tenth those peculiar to each one. The number of its Canon was then set under that of the section in the margin, and the Table inserted at the beginning or end of the manuscript. By this means it was possible to know in the case of each section whether a parallel was to be found in the other Gospels, and where. In the margin opposite John xv. 20, _e.g._, we find the numbers ρλθ/γ, _i.e._ 139/3. This tells us that this 139th section of John is also found in Matthew and Luke. For on referring to Canon 3 we find that it contains the passages common to John, Matthew, and Luke, and that this section numbered 139 in John, is 90 in Matthew and 58 in Luke. And the sections being numbered consecutively in each Gospel, we easily ascertain that the former is Matthew x. 24, and the latter Luke vi. 40. These, or similar numbers, were afterwards inserted in the lower margin of manuscripts, as, _e.g._, in Codex Argenteus of the Version of Ulfilas. They are still printed alongside the text in our larger editions, though, of course, owing to the introduction of our system of chapter and verse division they have lost their main significance.

[Sidenote: Revisions.]

Now, a Codex like א represents to us not one manuscript only, but several at once. It embodies first of all the manuscript from which its text was immediately derived, and then also that or those by which it was revised. That is to say, after the manuscript was written by the scribe, either to dictation or by copying, it was, particularly in the case of a costly manuscript, handed over to a person called the διορθωτής and revised. This might be done several times over; it might be done by a later owner if he were a scholar. But it might happen, as in the case of א _e.g._, that the exemplar by which the manuscript was revised was not the identical one from which it had been copied but a different one, perhaps older, perhaps exhibiting another form of text altogether. Tischendorf distinguished no fewer than seven correctors in א. One of these, belonging, it may be, to the seventh century, adds a note at the end of the book of Ezra to the following effect,—“This codex was compared with a very ancient exemplar which had been corrected by the hand of the holy martyr Pamphilus; which exemplar contained at the end the subscription in his own hand: ‘Taken and corrected according to the Hexapla of Origen: Antonius compared it: I, Pamphilus, corrected it.’”[63] A similar note is found appended to the Book of Esther, where it is also pointed out that variants occurred in the case of proper names. Traces are still discoverable in the Psalms which go to prove that the corrector’s Bible agreed with that of Eusebius, while the manuscript itself had been copied from one that was very different.

A considerable number of scholars are of opinion that א was written in the West, perhaps in Rome. (_See Plate I._)

Tischendorf: (1) _Notitia editionis_, 1860; (2) _Bibliorum Codex
Sinaiticus Petropolitanus_, Petropoli, 1862, fol. Vol. I.,
Prolegomena et Commentaria; Vol. IV., Novum Testamentum. (3) _N. T.
Sinaiticum_, Lips. 1863. (_Die Anfechtungen der Sinaibibel_, Lips.
1863; _Waffen der Finsterniss wider die Sinaibibel_, Lips. 1863.)
(4) _N. T. Graece ex Sinaitico Codice omnium antiquissimo_, Lips.
1865. _Collatio textus graeci editionis polyglottae cum Novo
Testamento Sinaitico. Appendix editionis Novi Testamenti
polyglottae_, Bielefeldiae. Sumptibus Velhagen et Klasing, 1894,
large 8vo, pp. iv. 96. (Preface only by Tischendorf.) On Kenyon’s
showing, the recent papyrus discoveries give no occasion for
abandoning the conclusions formerly come to regarding the age of
these parchment manuscripts (_Palaeography_, p. 120). Scrivener, _A
full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the
N. Testament_, 2nd edition, 1867. Ezra Abbot, “On the comparative
antiquity of the Sinaitic and Vatican Manuscripts of the Greek
Bible,” _Journal of the American Oriental Society_, vol. x., i.
1872, pp. 189 ff.

[Sidenote: A.]

A. CODEX ALEXANDRINUS: middle or end of the fifth century: written probably at Alexandria: contains a note in Arabic stating that it was presented to the library of the Patriarch of Alexandria in the year 1098. The Codex was sent by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, to Charles I. of England in 1628, and was deposited in the library of the British Museum on its foundation in 1753, where it has been ever since. It has been employed in the textual criticism of the New Testament since the time of Walton. It was printed in 1786 by Woide in facsimile from wooden type. The Old Testament portion of it was also published in 1816-1828 by Baber. The entire manuscript was issued in autotype facsimile in 1879 and 1880.

The Codex is defective at the beginning of the New Testament, the first twenty-six leaves down to Matthew xxv. 6 being absent, as also two containing John vi. 50-viii. 52, and three containing 2 Cor. iv. 13-xii. 6. It also contains after the Apocalypse the (first) Epistle of Clement of Rome and a small fragment of the so-called second Epistle, which is really an early sermon. In the Codex these are recognised as parts of the New Testament, inasmuch as in the table of contents prefixed to the entire work they are included with the other books under the title ἡ καινη διαθηκη.[64] After them is given the number of books ὁμου βιβλια, only the figures are now, unfortunately, torn away. The contents indicate that the Psalms of Solomon should have followed, but these have been lost with the rest of the manuscript.

A is distinguished among the oldest manuscripts by the use of capital letters to indicate new sections. But in order to economize room and to obviate spacing the lines, the first letter of the section, if it occurs in the middle of a line, is not written larger, but the one that occurs at the beginning of the next whole line is enlarged and projects into the margin. (_See Plate I. 2._) Later scribes have copied this so slavishly that they have written these letters in capitals even when they occur in the middle of the line in their manuscripts. The Egyptian origin of this Codex is shown by its use of Coptic forms for A and M. In several books A displays a remarkable affinity with Jerome in those very passages where he deviates from the older Latin version.

The books in A follow the order—Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, Apocalypse. (Westcott, _Canon_, Appendix D. xii.; _Bible in the Church_, Appendix B.)

Woide, 1786; eiusdem, _Notitia codicis Alexandrini, Recud. cur.
notasque adjecit_ G. L. Spohn, Lipsiae, 1788; Cowper, 1860, Hansell,
1864; Photographic facsimile by Thompson, 1879; and in the
Facsimiles of the Palæographical Society, Pl. 106.

The mixed character of the text of A was early observed; see
Lagarde, _Gesammelte Abhandlungen_, p. 94.

C. F. Hoole ascribes the Codex Alexandrinus to the middle of the
fourth century (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891; see _Academy_, July
25, 1891, 73).

[Sidenote: B.]

B. CODEX VATICANUS _par excellence_, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome, inserted there shortly after its foundation by Pope Nicolas V., and one of its greatest treasures. Like A it once contained the whole of the Old Testament with the exception of the Books of Maccabees. The first 31 leaves, containing Gen. i. 1-xlvi. 28, are now wanting, as well as 20 from the Psalms containing Ps. cv. (cvi.) 27-cxxxvii. (cxxxviii.) 6. The New Testament is complete down to Heb. ix. 14, where it breaks off at καθα[ριει]. 1 and 2 Tim., Titus, Philemon, and the Apocalypse are, therefore, also wanting. Rahlfs supposes that the manuscript may have originally contained the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas as well. Erasmus obtained some account of this manuscript, and Pope Sixtus V. made it the basis of an edition of the Greek Old Testament, which was published in 1586, thereby determining the _textus receptus_ of that portion of the Bible.—Would he had done the same for the New Testament! This task was undertaken afterwards, specially by Bentley and Birch. Professor Hug of Freiburg recognised the value of the Codex when it was removed from Rome to Paris by Napoleon in 1809. Cardinal Angelo Mai printed an edition of it between 1828 and 1838, which, however, did not appear till 1857, three years after his death, and which was most unsatisfactory. After Tischendorf had led the way with the Codex Sinaiticus, Pope Pio Nono gave orders for an edition, which was printed between 1868 and 1872 in five folio volumes. Not till 1881, however, did the last volume of this edition appear containing the indispensable commentary prepared under the supervision of Vercellone, J. Cozza, C. Sergio, and H. Fabiani, with the assistance of U. Ubaldi and A. Rocchi. Then at last the manuscript was photographed, the New Testament in 1889, and the Old Testament, in three volumes, in 1890—a veritable ἡλίου ἀνάθημα. No facsimile now can give any idea of its original beauty, because a hand of the tenth or eleventh century—or as the Roman editors say, a monk called Clement in the fifteenth century—went over the whole manuscript, letter by letter, with fresh ink, restoring the faded characters and at the same time adding accents and breathings in accordance with the pronunciation of his time (ἄμαξα, for example, and ἁλώπηξ, δἒ). The Old Testament is the work of at least two scribes, one of whom wrote down to 1 Sam. ix. 11, and the other to the end of 2 Esdras. Tischendorf’s opinion with regard to the writer of the New Testament has been already noticed. There can be no question that B is more carefully written than א. In the Gospels the Vatican exhibits a peculiar division into 170, 62, 152, and 80 sections respectively, which is found also in Ξ; in the Acts there is a double division into 36 and 69.[65] The enumeration affixed to the Pauline Epistles shows that these were copied from a manuscript in which Hebrews came after Galatians, though in B its position has been changed so as to follow 2 Thessalonians. The copyist has also retained in part of the Old Testament the enumeration of the stichoi which he found in his original. In the New Testament the order of the books is Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles. An increased interest would be lent to this manuscript if, as has been supposed, it represents the recension of the Egyptian Bishop and Martyr Hesychius, of which Jerome makes mention in two places. (Bousset, _Textkritische Studien zum Neuen Testament_, pp. 74-110, see especially p. 96.) On the Egyptian character of B, see also Burkitt in _Texts and Studies_, v. p. viii. f., and compare below, p. 183 f. (_See Plate IV._)

Hug, _Commentatio de antiquitate codicis Vaticani_, 1810.
Vercellone, _Dell’ antichissimo codice Vaticano della Bibbia Greca_,
1859; reprinted in his _Dissertazioni accademiche_, Roma, 1864, 115
ff. First facsimile reproduction, _Bibliorum sacrorum Graecus Codex
Vaticanus ... collatis studiis Caroli Vercellone et Josephi Cozza
editus_, vol. v., Rome, 1868; vol. vi. (Proleg. Comment. Tab. ed.
Henr. Fabiani et Jos. Cozza), 1881; _cf._ _ThLz._, 1882, vi. 9. A.
Giovanni, _Della Illustrazione dell’ edizione Romana del Codice
Vaticano_, Rome, 1869. Photographic edition, _Novum Testamentum e
Codice Vaticano 1209 ... phototypice repraesentatum ... curante Jos.
Cozza-Luzi_, Rome, 1889, fol.; see H. C. Hoskier, _The Expositor_,
1889, vol. x. 457 ff.; O. v. Gebhardt, _ThLz._, 1890, 16; Nestle,
_Sep.-St._, ii. 16 ff. Alf. Rahlfs, _Alter und Heimat der
Vatikanischen Bibelhandschrift_ (Nachrichten der Gesell. der Wiss.
zu Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 1889, Heft i. pp.
72-79). In this article Rahlfs seeks to prove that the number and
order of the books in the Old and New Testaments contained in B
correspond exactly to the Canon of the Scriptures given by
Athanasius in his thirty-ninth Festal Letter of the year 367. In it,
Athanasius, after mentioning all the canonical books of the Bible,
including those of the N. T., cites the extra-canonical books of the
O. T. which are allowed to be read, putting them after the second
group, βίβλοι στιχήρεις, because two of these books, Wisdom and
Sirach, were to be written στιχηδόν. In the N. T. the Greek and
Syriac forms of the Festal Letter put Hebrews expressly between the
Epistles to the Churches and the Pastoral Epistles. In the Sahidic
version of the Letter, however, Hebrews stands before Galatians.
This latter arrangement is evidently the survival of a
pre-Athanasian order which has been longer preserved in the Sahidic
translation.[66] But if B is the work of Athanasius, it follows that
it cannot be one of the Bibles ordered by Constantine. In this case
it would rather be written in Egypt, and we should have in it the
Recension of Hesychius, as Grabe supposed was the case in the O. T.,
while Hug held the same view in regard to the N. T. text of this
manuscript (see below, c. III.). Against the theory of Rahlfs, see
O. v. Gebhardt in the _Theologische Litteraturzeitung_, 1899, n. 20.

[Sidenote: C.]

C. CODEX EPHRAEMI RESCRIPTUS, No. 9 in the National Library at Paris, the most important of the palimpsests. This manuscript receives its name from the fact that in the twelfth century thirty-eight treatises of Ephraem, the Syrian Father (d. 373), were written over the original text. After various attempts had been made at its decipherment by Wettstein and others, Tischendorf in 1843 and 1845 published as much of the New and Old Testaments as he was able to make out after eighteen months’ labour, thereby establishing his reputation as a textual critic.

The manuscript once contained the entire Bible, but the whole of 1 and 2 Thessalonians has been lost, as also some 37 chapters from the Gospels, 10 from the Acts, 42 from the Epistles, and 8 from the Apocalypse. There is no trace of a chapter division in Acts, Epistles, or Apocalypse. This last seems to have been copied from an exemplar consisting of about 120 small leaves, one of which had been displaced by some mistake. The Codex dates from the fifth century, and may possibly have been written in Egypt. Its earliest corrections are important, and were inserted in the sixth century.

A detailed list of the contents of C is given by Scrivener, vol. i. 121. Facsimile, _ibid._, Plate X. p. 121.

Tischendorf, _Th. St. und Kr._, 1841, 126 ff; N. T. edited 1843, O.
T. 1845. Lagarde, _Ges. Abhandlungen_, p. 94. The page of the O. T.
which Tischendorf issued in facsimile has most unfortunately
disappeared, as Martin points out in his _Description technique des
manuscrits grecs relatifs au N. T., etc._, Paris, 1884, p. 4. A.
Jacob, _Notes sur les MSS. grecs palimpsestes de la Bibliothèque
Nationale_, in _Melanges Julien Havet_, 759-770.

The foregoing is what remains of the four great manuscripts which once contained the whole Bible. It will be observed that at the present time they are distributed among the Capitals of the great branches of the Christian Church—viz., St. Petersburg (Greek), Rome and Paris (Roman), and London (Anglican). German scholars have taken a foremost place in the work of their investigation.

[Sidenote: D.]

D. CODEX BEZAE CANTABRIGIENSIS, inferior to the foregoing in age, compass, and repute, but perhaps surpassing all of them in importance, by reason of its unique character. The manuscript was presented to the University of Cambridge in 1581 by Calvin’s friend Theodore Beza, “ut inter vere christianas antiquissimae plurimisque nominibus celeberrimae.” It is not earlier than the beginning of the sixth century, but is of peculiar importance as the oldest of the Greek-Latin manuscripts of the Bible. It now contains, with certain lacunæ, the Gospels (in the order Matthew, John, Luke, Mark), the concluding verses of the Latin text of 3 John, followed immediately by the Acts, showing that in this manuscript the Epistle of Jude either stood somewhere else or was absent altogether. At least nine later hands can be distinguished in it. The first scribe was more familiar with Latin than Greek, and therefore inserts a Roman letter here and there in the middle of a Greek word, and has frequently to use the sponge to wash out the mistakes he makes in writing his manuscript.[67] Innumerable passages occur, particularly in Luke and Acts, where the text of D differs in the most remarkable manner from that of all the Greek manuscripts we are acquainted with. It alone, _e.g._, contains after Luke vi. 4 the incident of the man working in the field on the Sabbath day, to whom Jesus said, “O Man, if thou knowest what thou doest, blessed art thou, but if thou knowest not, thou art cursed and a transgressor of the Law.” It is the only one also that has the words in Luke xi. 2, “when ye pray, use not vain repetitions as the λοιποί.” In Luke xxiii. 53, it says that the stone before the grave of Jesus was of such a size ὃν μόγις εἴκοσι ἐκύλιον, an addition in which it has the support of only one Latin MS. and the Sahidic Version. Again in Acts xii. 10, it is alone in recording that there were seven steps down from the prison in Jerusalem (κατέβησαν τοὺς ἑπτὰ βαθμούς). Other examples might be given of similar peculiar interpolations for the explanation of which reference must be made to c. III. below.

Its companion Latin text d is not translated directly from its own Greek but from the Greek of the parent manuscript. Seeing that the manuscript was discovered in the Monastery of Irenæus at Lyons, and that its text agrees with the Scripture quotations found in that Father even in the matter of clerical mistakes, it is possible that the Greek text is derived from his copy. The Greek occupies the left-hand page of the open volume, which is the place of honour. (_See Plates II and III._)

Kipling, Facsimile edition, _Codex Th. Bezae Cantabrigiensis_, 1793,
2 vols.; Scrivener, _Bezae Codex Cantabrigiensis. An exact copy in
ordinary type ... with critical introduction, annotations, and
facsimiles_. 4to, pp. lxiv + 453, 1864. Collation of the same by
Nestle, _Supplementum_, 1896 (see p. 26). Cambridge University
Press, _Photographic facsimile_. _Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis
Quattuor Evangelia et Actus Apostolorum continens Graece et Latine._
2 vols., pp. 830, 1899. 12 guineas. (See _Literature_, 29th April
1899, p. 451 ff.); Dav. Schulz, _Disputatio de Codice D._, 1827; K.
A. Credner, _Beiträge zur Einleitung_, vol. i., 1832, pp. 452-518;
J. R. Harris, _Codex Bezae. A study of the so-called Western Text of
the N. T._ (_Texts and Studies_, vol. ii.) Cambridge, 1891; also
_Credner and the Codex Bezae. A Lecture delivered in the Divinity
School, Cambridge, 19th Nov. 1892._ (_The Classical Review_, vol.
vii. 6, _June 1893_, pp. 237-243); Chase, _The Old Syriac Element in
the text of Codex Bezae_, London, 1893; also _The Syro-Latin Text of
the Gospels_, London, 1895; Nestle, _Some Observations on the Codex
Bezae_ in the _Expositor_, v. 2, 1895, p. 235; H. Trabaud, _Un
curieux manuscrit du N. T._ in the _Revue de théologie et de
philosophie_, Lausanne, 1896, p. 378; Fr. Blass: 1. _Die zwiefache
Textüberlieferung in der Apostelgeschichte_ (_Th. St. Kr._, 1894, p.
86 ff.); 2. _Acta Apostolorum sive Lucae ad Theophilum Liber alter.
Editio philologica_, Göttingen, 1895; 3. _Acta Apostolorum ...
secundum formam quae videtur Romanam_, Leipzig, 1896; 4. _Ueber die
verschiedenen Textformen in den Schriften des Lukas_ (_Neue
Kirchliche Zeitschrift_, 1895, p. 712); 5. _De duplici forma Actorum
Lucae_ (_Hermathena_, Dublin, 1895, p. 121); 6. _De variis formis
Evangelii Lucani_ (_Ibid._, Dublin, 1896, p. 291); 7. _Neue
Texteszeugen für die Apostelgeschichte_ (_Th. St. Kr._, 1896, p.
436); 8. _Evangelium secundum Lucam sive Lucae ad Theophilum Liber
prior. Secundum formam quae videtur Romanam_, Leipzig, 1897; B.
Weiss, _Der Codex D in der Apostelgeschichte. Textkritische
Untersuchung_, Leipzig, 1897, (= Texte und Untersuchungen. N. F.
Zweiter Band, Heft 1); F. Graefe, _Der Codex Bezae und das
Lucasevangelium_, _Th. St. Kr._, 1898, i. 116-140; compare
especially, _On the Italian Origin of Codex Bezae. 1. Codex Bezae
and cod. 1071_, by the Rev. K. Lake; _2. The Marginal Notes of
Lections_, by the Rev. F. E. Brightman in the _Journal of
Theological Studies_, i. 3 (April 1900) pp. 441-454. Codex 1071 is a
minuscule on Mt. Athos, in which the text of the Pericope Adulterae
(John viii.) is essentially the same as the singular text exhibited
by D. It seems to have come from Calabria. The lectionary indicated
in the margin of D points to a mixed Greek and Latin population such
as that in the South of Italy.

In what follows the manuscripts are grouped according to their contents as copies of the Gospels, Acts and Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, or of the Apocalypse.

[Sidenote: Gospels.]

E. CODEX BASILIENSIS, by some ascribed to the seventh century, but belonging more probably to the eighth: brought to Europe by Cardinal John de Ragusio, who was sent on a mission to the Greeks by the Council of Basel (1431): used by Mill, Bengel, and Wettstein: Luke iii. 4-15 and xxiv. 47-53 wanting: has been in the University Library at Basel since 1559. (Scrivener, i. p. 131, Plate XI. 27.)

F. BOREELIANUS, written in the ninth century: so called as belonging at one time to a Dutchman named John Boreel: now in Utrecht: has many lacunæ, some of which have arisen since Wettstein collated the manuscript in 1730. (Scrivener, i. 131, Plate XI. 28.)

F^a. COISLINIANUS, of the seventh century, though some say the sixth and others the eighth: consists of only 26 verses from Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, 1 and 2 Cor., Gal., Col., and Heb., written on the margin of a famous Parisian manuscript of the Octoteuch in Greek containing Gen.-Deut., Josh., Jud., and Ruth. List of contents of F^a in Scrivener, i. 134.

G. SEIDELIANUS, of the tenth century: part of it in the British Museum in London and part in Trinity College, Cambridge: brought from the East by Seidel and presented in 1718 by the Berlin Librarian La Croze to J. Chr. Wolf, a clergyman in Hamburg who cut out half a page to send to Bentley in 1721. (Scrivener, i. 131, Plate XI. 29.)

H. SEIDELIANUS II., of the ninth century, in Hamburg: bequeathed with his library to his native city by Wolf, and rediscovered there in 1838. (Scrivener, i, 134, Plate XII. 31.)

I. TISCHENDORFIANUS II., fragments of seven manuscripts in St. Petersburg found by Tischendorf in the Monastery of Mar Saba, near the Dead Sea: consists of 28 palimpsest leaves with Greek writing of the tenth century containing only 255 verses of the New Testament, of which 190 are from the Gospels: the three oldest leaves are of the fifth century; some of them are perhaps parts of a once complete Bible: detailed list of contents in Scrivener, i. 134 f.

I^b. So indicated by Tischendorf in his eighth edition, formerly known as N^b, of the fourth or more probably the fifth century: a threefold palimpsest written first in Greek and afterwards twice in Syriac: contains 17 verses from John’s Gospel: now in the British Museum: list of verses in Scrivener, i. 141.

K. CYPRIUS, No. 63 in the National Library at Paris: middle of the ninth century: purchased in Cyprus for Colbert in 1673: one of the six, or including Ω seven, complete uncial manuscripts of the Gospels, the others being א BMSU (Ω). Facsimile in Scrivener, i., Plate VII. p. 153.

L. REGIUS, No. 62 in the National Library at Paris: of the eighth century: contains the four Gospels complete with the exception of five lacunæ in Matthew iv. v. and xxviii., Mark x. and xv., and in John xxi.: important as showing the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel which is exhibited as yet, except in versions, in only three other uncials (ד, ק, and Ψ) and one minuscule (see Plate X.). Facsimile of L, Mark xvi. 8, 9, in Scrivener, i., Plate IX. 21, p. 137. The conclusions, as found in L, ד, ק, and Ψ, are printed and discussed in Swete’s _Gospel according to St. Mark_, pp. xcviii, xcix. See also Westcott and Hort’s Introduction, Appendix, p. 28 ff.; Scrivener, ii. 337; Hastings’ _Dictionary of the Bible_, iii. p. 13.

M. CAMPIANUS, 48 in the National Library, Paris: of the ninth century: presented to Louis XIV. by the Abbé François de Camps, 1st January 1706: contains the four Gospels complete: one of the oldest manuscripts, with the exception of D, that exhibit the pericope of the adulteress, John vii. 53 ff. Facsimile in Scrivener, i., Plate XII. p. 134.

N. PURPUREUS, belonging to the end of the sixth century: one of the most lovely manuscripts, consisting of 45 leaves, of which 6 are in the Vatican Library at Rome, 4 in the British Museum, 2 in Vienna, and the remaining 33 in the Monastery of St. John in Patmos, from which, in all probability, the others were carried off. The manuscript is written with silver letters on a purple ground, only the letters are not printed on it with movable type as was formerly supposed in the case of the similar Codex Argenteus of Ulfilas. The contents are given in Scrivener, i. 139 f., and a facsimile at p. 98, Plate V. 182 other leaves belonging to this manuscript were recently acquired in Cappadocia for Russia.

The Vienna fragment is most beautifully printed in facsimile in that
superb work, _Die Wiener Genesis_, edited by Wilh. Ritter von Hartel
and Franz Wickhoff: Supplement to vols. xv. and xvi. of the
_Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten
Kaiserhauses_. Vienna, 1895. Hartel (p. 142) sees no reason why the
manuscript should not be ascribed to the fifth century.

The text of Codex N, including the new Russian fragments, has been
published with Introduction and Appendix by the Rev. H. S. Cronin in
_Texts and Studies_, v. 4, 1899. The Appendix contains a collation
of the Gospel of Mark in the Codex Imperatricis Theodorae (Scriv.
473: Hort 81: Tisch. 2^{pe}: Greg. 565; see note on p. 151). See
Nestle in the _Zeitschrift für wiss. Theologie_, 42 (1899), pp.
621-623.

Some leaves of another purple manuscript have been acquired in
Paris. See H. Omont, _Acad. des Inscr._, Mars-Avril 1900.

O. In Moscow, consists of a few leaves taken from the binding of a book: contains 15 verses from John’s Gospel i. and xx.: written in the ninth century.

O^{a-h}. Psalters, in which are found, after the Psalms among the poetic selections from the Bible, the Magnificat, the Benedictus, and the Nunc Dimittis from the first and second chapters of Luke’s Gospel. O^c is a Greek Psalter of the sixth century written in Latin characters and is at Verona. O^d is a purple Psalter of the seventh century at Zurich. O^e at St. Gall is a Psalter of the ninth century, written partly in Latin and partly in Greek.

P and Q. Two palimpsests at Wolfenbüttel, the former belonging to the sixth and the latter to the fifth century. P, it appears, came from Bobbio and was afterwards at Weissenburg, Mayence, and Prague. Q, together with a portion of Ulfilas’s Gothic Bible, has been employed to receive the works of Isidore of Seville. The codices were edited with great care by Tischendorf in 1869.

R. NITRIENSIS, of the sixth century: in the British Museum: consists of 48 leaves containing some 516 verses from Luke’s Gospel, over which and a manuscript of 4000 verses of the Iliad, the Syriac works of Severus of Antioch were written in the ninth century. The palimpsest was brought from the Nitrian Desert in 1847, and deposited in the British Museum. (Scrivener, i. 145, Plate VI, 17.)

S. VATICANUS 354: one of the earliest manuscripts of the Greek New Testament that bears an exact date. At the end is written, ἐγράφη ἡ τιμία δέλτος αὕτη διὰ χειρὸς ἐμοῦ Μιχαὴλ μοναχοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ μηνὶ Μαρτίῳ α’, ἡμέρᾳ έ, ὥρᾳ ϛ’, ἔτους ϛυνζ’, ἰνδικτιῶνος ζ’, _i.e._ at six o’clock on Thursday, 1st March 6457 in the 7th Indiction[68] or 949 A.D.

T^a. Of the fifth century: in the Museum Borgianum at Rome: written probably by a Coptic monk: unfortunately a mere fragment containing only 17 leaves from Luke and John: is written in two columns, that on the left containing a Sahidic version. T^b, similar small fragments of John in St. Petersburg of the sixth century. T^c, also of the sixth century, a fragment of Matthew, formerly in the possession of Bishop Porfiri Uspenski of Kiev, and now at St. Petersburg. T^d, of the seventh century, in Rome, part of a Sahidic-Greek Evangeliarium, containing a few verses from Matthew, Mark, and John. T^e, of the sixth century (?), at Cambridge, consists of four verses, Matthew iii. 13-16. T^h (T^k in _TiGr._ p. 450), three leaves from Matthew xx. and xxii. T^{i-r}, fragments of six Greek-Coptic and three Greek Gospels of the ninth and tenth centuries, but possibly the seventh and eighth, published by Amélineau in vol. xxxiv. of the _Notices et Extraits de la Bibliothèque Nationale_, 1895, 363 ff.; _cf._ v. Dobschütz in the _Lit. Cent.-Blatt._, 1895, 42, 1857. T^l contains the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel. T^{woi}, similar leaves at Oxford which once belonged to Woide, but by a different hand from T^a.

To these Græco-Coptic fragments there is now to be added two chapters of John’s Gospel (iii. 5-iv. 49), in Greek and Middle Egyptian, written in the sixth century. They are published by W. E. Crum and F. G. Kenyon in the _Journal of Theological Studies_, i. 3 (April 1900), pp. 415-433. The find contains no remarkable readings. The editors call its text neutral, and think it helps to show that Egypt was the home of such correct and upright texts. (T^w Greg.)

U. NANIANUS, so called from a former possessor: of the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century: in Venice: a very beautiful and complete manuscript of the Gospels, with ornamentations in gold. (Scrivener, i. 137, Plate IX. 22.)

V. Formerly at Mount Athos, now in Moscow: of the ninth century: first employed by Bengel and Wettstein through the medium of G. B. Bilfinger.

W. Various small fragments: W^a of the eighth century in Paris: a fragment of Luke. W^b of the eighth century (or the ninth) in Naples: a palimpsest with parts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. W^c of the ninth century at St. Gall: a palimpsest, containing fragments of Mark and Luke, perhaps once bilingual, Greek-Latin. W^d of the ninth century in Cambridge. W^e of the ninth century: part of John, at Mount Athos, Oxford, and Athens. W^f of the ninth century: in Oxford: fragment of Mark. W^g of the ninth century: consisting of 36 palimpsest leaves with 497 verses from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in the British Museum. W^h of the ninth century: in Oxford: part of Mark. W^{i-m} in Paris, of the seventh to the eighth or ninth century: fragments of Mark and Luke, of which W^l and W^k are printed in Omont’s _Catalogue des Manuscrits Grecs, Latins, Français, et Espagnols et des Portulans, recueillis par feu Emmanuel Miller_, Paris, 1897. W^n of the seventh century, in Vienna: fragments of John. W^o of the ninth century, in Milan: 16 mutilated palimpsest leaves, containing portions of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

X. MONACENSIS, written at the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century, now in Munich, contains the Gospels, with lacunæ, and a commentary, in the order Matthew, John, Luke, Mark. Scrivener, i. 343, Plate XIII. 38; for contents see _ibid._, p. 152.

X^b. Fragment containing Luke i. 1-ii. 40, hitherto reckoned among the minuscules and numbered 429; also in Munich.

Y. Belonging to the eighth century, in the Barberini Library at Rome: 6 leaves containing John xvi. 3-xix. 41.

Z. A palimpsest in Dublin of the fifth or sixth century, containing 295 verses of Matthew’s Gospel. Scrivener, i. 153; Plate VII. 18.

The Roman alphabet not being sufficient for the number of uncial manuscripts, recourse was taken to those letters of the Greek and Hebrew which have a distinct form from those already employed. It was proposed by others to reserve the Greek letters for those manuscripts no longer extant, whose text can be reconstructed from a number of kindred manuscripts as their common archetype.

Γ. Of the ninth or tenth century: part in Oxford and part in St. Petersburg, the former having been obtained from Tischendorf in 1855 and the latter in 1859: contains the whole of Luke and John, but Mark is defective from iii. 34 to vi. 20, while Matthew is still more defective. The writing of the manuscript was finished on a certain Thursday, the 27th November, in the eighth year of an indiction. Tischendorf accordingly fixed its date as 844. It was previously assigned by Gardthausen to the year 979. Scrivener, i. 134, Plate XII. 35.

Δ. SANGALLENSIS, written at the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century: now at St. Gall, where it was probably transcribed by an Irish monk: has an interlinear Latin version, and was not, therefore, like D, intended for church but for school purposes. The Codex has the four Gospels complete with the exception of John xix. 17-35. In Mark the text shows a closer agreement with CL than in the other Gospels. The manuscript has been copied from one written _scriptione continua_, and in consequence the words are often wrongly divided. See G_{3} below, p. 77.

Θ^{a-d}. Small fragments brought from the East by Tischendorf, of which Θ^a belongs to the seventh century, and Θ^{bcd} to the seventh, sixth, and seventh or eighth century respectively. The first is in Leipzig, the others in St. Petersburg. Θ^{e-h} were formerly in the possession of Bishop Porfiri of Kiev.

Λ. Of the ninth century: contains the Gospels of Luke and John entire: evidently the second part of a minuscule brought to St. Petersburg by Tischendorf, No. 566^{evv} (Greg.)[69]: marginal scholia are affixed to four passages in Matthew—viz. iv. 5, xvi. 17, xviii. 22, xxvi. 74, giving the readings of τὸ Ἰoυδαϊκόν, _i.e._ the lost Gospel according to the Hebrews, and its subscription runs, ἐγράφη καὶ ἀντεβλήθη ἐκ τῶν Ἱεροσολύμοις παλαιῶν ἀντιγράφων τῶν ἐν τῷ ὄρει ἁγίῳ ἀποκειμένων· ἐν στίχοις βφιδ’ (2514) κεφαλαῖς τνε’ (345). The manuscript is in the Bodleian Library at Oxford. Scrivener, i. 131, Plate XI. 30.

_Cf._ von Dobschütz, _Zwei Bibelhandschriften mit doppelter
Schriftart_ (_Th. Lz._, 1889, iii. 74 f.).

Ξ. ZACYNTHIUS, a palimpsest of the eighth century from Zante, now in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society in London: the earliest manuscript with a commentary: has the same system of chapter division as B, and is oftener found supporting B against A than _vice versa_.

Π. Of the ninth century: contains the Gospels almost complete: once the property of a Greek of Smyrna called Parodos: procured by Tischendorf for the Emperor of Russia.

Σ. Of the sixth century: written on purple with gold and silver lettering and 17 miniatures, being the earliest manuscript to contain such: rescued from obscurity in 1879 by Oscar v. Gebhardt and A. Harnack, who discovered it at Rossano in Calabria: hence designated as Codex Rossanensis: is nearly related to N. Scrivener, i. 124, Plate XIV. 43.

O. v. Gebhardt, _Die Evangelien des Matthäus und des Marcus aus dem
Codex Purpureus Rossanensis herausgegeben_ (T. und U., i. 4, 1883).
A. Haseloff, _Cod. Pur. Rossanensis. Die Miniaturen der griechischen
Evangelien-Handschrift in Rossano. Nach photographischen Aufnahmen
herausgegeben._ Leipzig, 1898 (contains 14 facsimiles of the text
and 15 photographic plates). _Vide_ S. Berger in _Bull. Crit._,
1899, 6: also F. X. v. Funk, _Die Zeit. des Cod. Rossanensis_ in the
_Hist. Jahrbuch der Görresgeschellschaft_, xvii. 2, 1896, 331-344.

Φ. CODEX BERATINUS, of the sixth century: at Berat in Albania: like the last a purple Codex with silver writing: contains portions of Matthew and Mark: seen and published by Batiffol. Scrivener, i. 166, Plate XV.

Ψ. Fragments of the eighth or ninth century at Athos: contains Mark ix. 5 to the end, Luke, John, Acts, seven Catholic Epistles, Romans to Philemon, and Hebrews: exhibits after Mark xvi. 8 the same double conclusion as is found in L and one Sinai manuscript. On some readings of Ψ, see Lake in the _Journal of Theological Studies_, No. i. p, 88; ii. pp. 290-292.

Ω. Of the eighth or ninth century: in the Monastery of Dionysius at Athos: contains the Gospels entire.

The last-mentioned codices have not yet been thoroughly collated, some of them having been only recently discovered.

The following are indicated by Hebrew letters.

ב. Of the ninth or tenth century: in the Monastery of St. Andrew at Athos: contains the Gospels with lacunæ.

ג. GREGORIANUS, a purple manuscript from Cappadocia now admitted to be part of N.

ד^{6-13}. Several leaves dating from the fifth to the ninth century, discovered at Sinai by J. R. Harris and published by him (_Biblical fragments from Mount Sinai_, 1890): ד^{12} contains the double conclusion of Mark: ד^{13} is a purple fragment of the seventh century containing a few verses from the first chapter of Luke, perhaps only a quotation.

ק. Swete indicates with this letter the fragment cited above as T^l, which exhibits the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel. See his _Gospel according to St. Mark_, pp. xcii., xcix.

ר. An Oxyrhynchus fragment of the fifth or sixth century, published by Grenfell and Hunt, _The Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Part I. with eight Plates, London, 1898: contains only Mark x. 50 f. and xi. 10 f.: cited by Swete. (T^g Greg.)